H. N's.

VINDICATION

OF THE

APPENDIX

T

AGAINST

PAPER V.

O the Cafe in Hypothefi, T. B. fays, That the general Law of God is eafily applicable to Particulars, because no temporal Damages or Perfecution can difpenfe with the Duty of a Father in fo important a Cafe, as laying a true Foundation of Faith in the Souls of his Children, and that they are to fupport themselves with thofe well-known Sentences: God is to be Obeyed rather than Man, and Happy are they who fuffer Perfecution for Justice fake.

Here it is obfervable, That in the Cafe hypothetically stated, two Things were propos'd by me; one the Difficulties of obtaining a Portion without compliance, which was only hinted at; and the other (chiefly infifted on) the way how the Popish Gentleman came by his paternal Right: And that T. B. only takes Notice of the former and quite waves the latter. This then is the Cafe, The Popish Father got his Paternal Right by a furreptitious Marriage. The Lady's Father had a Right to difpofe of his Daughter in Marriage. This Right he was Robb'd of. So. that it was by Robbery (T. B. will not understand me if I do not fpeak plain) that the Popish Gentleman came by his Paternal

b 2

Right,

Right, and we demand Satisfaction for this great Wrong, fince Reftitution cannot be made. Against this T. B. pretends Confcience, and the Obligation of a Father to Educate his Children in the true Faith. And I appeal to the World, Whether the Great Turk did not once Solve a parallel Cafe with much more Equity. Selimus had Robb'd fome Perfian Merchants, fome of his Bafha's advis'd him to build an Hofpital with the Spoils : But he abhorring the Thoughts of making his Injuftice to Minister to his Charity, order'd a full Reftitution to be made. In the Cafe before us, A Protestant Family hath been Robb'd by a Papist of a very valuable Treafure (fuch we efteem our Children) and T. B. advises to build up a Popish Family with the Spoils; whilft H. N. firft demands Reftitution or Satisfaction as far as poffible; and confequently in this Debate about Education, to fuppofe Circumftances fuch as they were before the ftol'n Marriage. And fince in France and other Popish Countries the Grandfather's Plea in fuch a Cafe, would take Place against a Protestant, there is as much Reafon that it fhould do fo here in England against a Papist: If we want a Law (fuch as they have in Popish Countries) to oblige the Popish Father to do us this Juftice, its high Time to represent to the Government this our want. And whether T. B.. will advise the Gentleman to fuch Obftinacy as will force us to that Extremity, is what H. N. propos'd in the Cafe, and he wifely declines, because he knows not how to Anfwer. As to what he fays of Perfecution, he cannot be Ignorant how many Martyrs we can boaft of, made fuch, for denying their burning Doctrin of Tranfubftantiation; but fince the Caufe makes the difference beween a Martyr and a Malefactor; I fee not how they can be faid to fuffer for Righteousness Sake, that fuffer for fuch a monftrous Abfurdity; nor for Obeying God rather than Men, who lose any thing for that late human Invention.

A VIN

す

A

VINDICATION

OF

H.N's. REFLECTIONS

ON

T. B's. REASONS

ABOUT

EDUCATION,

Against his

ANSWER

IN

PAPER the Fourth.

INCE T. B. undertakes to justify two Mistakes I obferv'd in his Reasons, I will Examine them a little further; tho' otherwife, as not material to the Business in Debate, I should have wav'd them.

If

any Widow hath Children or Nephews, let them learn (uarda- i Tim. 5. 4. vilwaav) to fhew Piety (svetßer) as Home, and to requite their Pa

rents.

Now

Now I defire to know of T. B. why the Verb Plural μavdavelay ought not to agree with Children, rather than a Widow? And how he can vindicate his vulgar Latin for rendering it dif cat, and evoßer by pracffe or regere? I defire him further to confider, with what Propriety thole ancient Widows can be urg'd (as his Version fuppofes) to a Pious Education of their Families, as a requital of their Parents, who-having been Heathens, had not much oblig'd them by their Education. But understand it as an Admonition to Children to provide for their Mother or Grandmother that was a Widow, all co-here very well. Let them learn to fhew Piety in a tender Care of their Domesticks, and thereby requite their Parents, who in their helpless Infancy took Care of them.

As to his reckoning of Eleazar with Aaron, among the Anceftors of Eli, it must be an Over-fight, and as fuch I should have pafs'd it by, but that he pretends to justify it by the Term of a Collateral Anceftor; for if he confult Pedigrees, he will scarce find it proper, when he is fpeaking of a Deicendent from Aaron by his fourth Son Ithamar, to call Aaron's other Son Eleazar his Anceftor, who belongs not to Eli's Pedigree.

But I wonder that T. B. that takes Notice of these little Things, which are nothing to the Merits of the Caufe, fays not one word to the Cafe, as I ftated it in France, which is abfolutely necessary to a fair Determination of it. All his Anfwer confifts in a bold Affirmation, that neither Mothers nor Grandfathers have any thing to do with Children under the Father's Power, who is Supreme in his own Family: And this without either answering the Inftance, I produc'd in the Education of Timothy, by his Mother and Grandmother in a Religion contrary to his Father's; or taking the least Notice of what is done in France, and other Popifh Countries, in violently taking away their Children from Proteftant Parents.

I have ftated the Cafe more fully in an Appendix to my first Remarks, and fo as I hope T. B. will find himself oblig'd to make fome Condefcentions for the accommodating of Difficulties, not otherwife likely to be furmounted.

T. B's.

T. B's.

REJOYNDER

ΤΟ

PAPER VII.

IN his Reply to T. B's. Solutions, H. N feems first to make 1 Tim. 5. 41 fome Difficulty, how μardavetoav being a Verb Plural can agree with ris xiga a Noun Singular. To which is anfwer'd, That his Grammar might have fatisfy'd him, as to this, without troubling T. B. Does not he know that Enalage's of one Number for another, as well as of one Mood or Tenfe for another, are ufual in that Language? Figura conftructionis, &c. Befides, Gr. Gramahad he tranflated the Greek faithfully, and put any Widow not a Widow for τις χήρα, he might have confider'd that τίς χήρα is an Indefinite, implying a fort of Plurality, as if one should fay if any Widow one or other, and confequently may agree with its Verb in Senfe, tho' not in Voice, as is allow'd in all Languages. Moreover, if we had not thefe Rules to justify the vulgar Edition review'd by the Learned Linguist St. Jerome, and approv'd by the ufe of the whole Latin Church for above Twelve Hundred Years, what Reafon have we to Tye St. Paul to an ex- egμónoz actness of Expreffion in all Things, whom the Eloquent Athenians call'd a Semiverbian, or half Languag'd Man, or a Sower of Words to fignify the unufualnefs of his Expreffions according to the Greek, and who declares himself that he pretended not to Blaufibility of Difcourfe, but to Wisdom among the Perfect? 1 Cor. 2. 43.

And

A&. 17. 18.